IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sce/scecf1/184.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

On Inflation and the Persistence of shocks to Output

Author

Listed:
  • Maral Kichian and Richard Luger, Bank of Canada

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to examine whether the level of inflation matters for the persistence of output growth when shocks to output have asymmetric effects. The idea that inflation could have such threshold effects is worth investigating because some authors have suggested that a low inflation environment was instrumental in generating the unprecedented strong and sustained output growth rates recently witnessed in some countries. In a separate literature the debate has been ongoing with respect to whether shocks to output growth have asymmetric effects on its persistence. For example, Beaudry and Koop (1993) have shown that, by including an index variable that captures the depth of recessions in a standard ARMA model, positive shocks yield a substantially different effect on output dynamics than negative ones. On the other hand, using unobserved-component models with a threshold variable, Elwood (1998) finds that these two types of shocks do not lead to significantly different estimates of output growth persistence. This discrepancy in results may lie in the fact that these models are not general enough. Thus, a good strategy would be to combine elements from both studies and to use a more flexible modeling framework to examine this asymmetry question. In this paper we generalize the Elwood (1998) model by extending it to an ARMA setting while allowing for multiple threshold effects. Using Canadian data we then test for inflation threshold effects on output growth dynamics, as well as for asymmetric impacts of output shocks. The dynamics parameters are therefore assumed to change depending on 1) whether lagged disturbances are positive or negative, and 2) on whether inflation is above or below some estimated threshold level. The estimation is carried out using maximum likelihood and Kalman filtering while hypotheses are tested via the application of tests developed by Hansen (1996) for when a nuisance parameter is present only under the alternative. Our first result concurs with that of Beaudry and Koop and shows that positive shocks indeed lead to a significantly higher output growth persistence than do negative shocks. In addition we find that, with positive shocks, the asymmetry is more marked when inflation is above its threshold value; that is, while negative shocks display a similar persistence, positive shocks to output are more persistent when inflation is in the low regime than when it is in the high one. Therefore, low inflation can be associated with a healthier output growth dynamics compared to an environment of high inflation. Finally, we find the interesting result that the estimated threshold value for Canada is approximately 4%, which is one per cent higher than the upper limit of the Bank of Canada announced inflation target bands for the post-1996 period.

Suggested Citation

  • Maral Kichian and Richard Luger, Bank of Canada, 2001. "On Inflation and the Persistence of shocks to Output," Computing in Economics and Finance 2001 184, Society for Computational Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:sce:scecf1:184
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hansen, Bruce E, 1996. "Inference When a Nuisance Parameter Is Not Identified under the Null Hypothesis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(2), pages 413-430, March.
    2. Beaudry, Paul & Koop, Gary, 1993. "Do recessions permanently change output?," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 149-163, April.
    3. Potter, Simon M, 1995. "A Nonlinear Approach to US GNP," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(2), pages 109-125, April-Jun.
    4. John Y. Campbell & N. Gregory Mankiw, 1987. "Are Output Fluctuations Transitory?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 102(4), pages 857-880.
    5. Peter K. Clark, 1987. "The Cyclical Component of U. S. Economic Activity," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 102(4), pages 797-814.
    6. John B. Taylor, 1998. "Monetary policy and the long boom," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, issue Nov, pages 3-12.
    7. Andrews, Donald W K, 1993. "Tests for Parameter Instability and Structural Change with Unknown Change Point," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(4), pages 821-856, July.
    8. Elwood, S. Kirk, 1998. "Is the persistence of shocks to output asymmetric?," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 411-426, April.
    9. Donald W. K. Andrews, 2003. "Tests for Parameter Instability and Structural Change with Unknown Change Point: A Corrigendum," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(1), pages 395-397, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mehmet Caner & Bruce E. Hansen, 1998. "Threshold Autoregressions with a Near Unit Root," Working Papers 9821, Department of Economics, Bilkent University.
    2. Gonzalo, Jesus & Pitarakis, Jean-Yves, 2002. "Estimation and model selection based inference in single and multiple threshold models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 110(2), pages 319-352, October.
    3. Gonzalo, Jesus & Martinez, Oscar, 2006. "Large shocks vs. small shocks. (Or does size matter? May be so.)," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 135(1-2), pages 311-347.
    4. Gonzalo, Jesùs & Pitarakis, Jean-Yves, 2005. "Threshold effects In multivariate error correction models," Discussion Paper Series In Economics And Econometrics 0501, Economics Division, School of Social Sciences, University of Southampton.
    5. Jesús Gonzalo & Jean-Yves Pitarakis, 2013. "Estimation and inference in threshold type regime switching models," Chapters, in: Nigar Hashimzade & Michael A. Thornton (ed.), Handbook of Research Methods and Applications in Empirical Macroeconomics, chapter 8, pages 189-205, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Öğünç, Fethi & Akdoğan, Kurmaş & Başer, Selen & Chadwick, Meltem Gülenay & Ertuğ, Dilara & Hülagü, Timur & Kösem, Sevim & Özmen, Mustafa Utku & Tekatlı, Necati, 2013. "Short-term inflation forecasting models for Turkey and a forecast combination analysis," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 312-325.
    7. Sinclair Tara M, 2009. "Asymmetry in the Business Cycle: Friedman's Plucking Model with Correlated Innovations," Studies in Nonlinear Dynamics & Econometrics, De Gruyter, vol. 14(1), pages 1-31, December.
    8. Clements, Michael P. & Smith, Jeremy, 1997. "The performance of alternative forecasting methods for SETAR models," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 463-475, December.
    9. Yu, Ping & Phillips, Peter C.B., 2018. "Threshold regression with endogeneity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 203(1), pages 50-68.
    10. Zivot, Eric & Andrews, Donald W K, 2002. "Further Evidence on the Great Crash, the Oil-Price Shock, and the Unit-Root Hypothesis," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 20(1), pages 25-44, January.
    11. Sandberg, Rickard, 2016. "Trends, unit roots, structural changes, and time-varying asymmetries in U.S. macroeconomic data: the Stock and Watson data re-examined," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 52(PB), pages 699-713.
    12. Perron, Pierre & Rodriguez, Gabriel, 2003. "GLS detrending, efficient unit root tests and structural change," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 115(1), pages 1-27, July.
    13. Andrews, Donald W K & Ploberger, Werner, 1994. "Optimal Tests When a Nuisance Parameter Is Present Only under the Alternative," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(6), pages 1383-1414, November.
    14. Carrasco, Marine, 2002. "Misspecified Structural Change, Threshold, and Markov-switching models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 239-273, August.
    15. Donald W.K. Andrews, 1992. "An Introduction to Econometric Applications of Functional Limit Theory for Dependent Random Variables," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1020, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    16. Clements, Michael P & Smith, Jeremy, 1999. "A Monte Carlo Study of the Forecasting Performance of Empirical SETAR Models," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(2), pages 123-141, March-Apr.
    17. Hinich, Melvin J. & Foster, John & Wild, Phillip, 2006. "Structural change in macroeconomic time series: A complex systems perspective," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 136-150, March.
    18. Lanouar Charfeddine & Dominique Guegan, 2008. "Is it possible to discriminate between different switching regressions models? An empirical investigation," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00368358, HAL.
    19. Alain Guay & Olivier Scaillet, 1999. "Indirect Inference, Nuisance Parameter and Threshold Moving Average," Cahiers de recherche CREFE / CREFE Working Papers 95, CREFE, Université du Québec à Montréal.
    20. Yu-Lieh Huang & Chao-Hsi Huang, 2007. "The persistence of Taiwan's output fluctuations: an empirical study using innovation regime-switching model," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(20), pages 2673-2679.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Threshold; Asymmetry; Persistence; Output Growth;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • E0 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - General
    • C5 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling
    • E3 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Prices, Business Fluctuations, and Cycles

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sce:scecf1:184. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Christopher F. Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sceeeea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.